Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[Contra Mundum]

stopped reading there..You should step out past you're front door occasionally

What - paid up volvo driving latte sipper - can't feel the oppression. "We shall overcome" "We shall overcome"

 

[Anton Chigurh]

What - paid up volvo driving latte sipper - can't feel the oppression. "We shall overcome" "We shall overcome"

obnoxious much ? Does it work with the ladies or do they think you're a fraud ?

 

[Vic Vinegar]

Nah as us Mangina having Beta Males who have been co-opted by the enemy say: its about oppressing the poor rich white middle class males who are the victims - the real victims of the feminisation of Western Culture which the invidious spead of Cultural Marxism is propogating

We should have a great hetro man only culture like the Spartans who used to comb each other's hair before battle. The greatest warriors the world have seen - no feminazi crap there - and as straight as they come!

Maybe those poor rich white middle class women who are the victims of such incredible oppression can set out and create their own Amazonian woman-only culture.

And * off and leave the rest of us alone.

 

[Gus Poyet]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7903165/Loving-dads-year-of-torment

The feminazis created the atmosphere of the above article which now sickeningly permeates through our society.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

I think MRAs are mostly traditionalists. Traditionalism and feminism are two sides of the same coin, for both are gynocentric, but in different ways.

Not necessarily traditionalist, I'd argue most MRA's argue a particularly modern line for gender relations.

The for women aspect of MRA's is paternalistic, but that is generally no different from the efforts of a declared male feminist.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Maggie5]

obnoxious much ? Does it work with the ladies or do they think you're a fraud ?

Works for me, I enjoy Contra Mundum's posts.

 

[Anton Chigurh]

Works for me, I enjoy Contra Mundum's posts.

yeah sure

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Here's an article on cultural marxism that is well worth a read.

I got less half way through the article and knew it was trash. Too many well worn cliches, attacking the same straw man that the hard right conservatives themselves are attacking now.

Marxism, has always been a radically individualistic philosophy, and socialism itself was never going to manifest itself from the crude superstitious industrialised societies of the early 20th century. Marx himself knew this. The Reds didn't seem to catch on.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that the Neo-liberalism and cultural deconstructionism is coming together with stupendous symmetry and uniformity in the early 21st century.

As it stands critical social theory is by its very nature a one sided socioideological critique of society as it is or as its portrayed to be. It by its very transformative nature anti societal, anti institutional and anti government. Perhaps even so far to say in the extreme cases, that its as anti reality as strong conservatism is. It's the type of ideological strain that libertarians can get on, but few other right wingers could really espouse.

It's not to say that critical theory can't itself become more positivist in its dialect. Increasingly it appeals to matter of facts and self evidential truths. II'd go on to say that the inevitable conclusion of cultural Marxism is engrained social change and the creation of new social normatives.

Feminism is arriving at new atomised dialectic, not a whole one like a traditionalist or conservative ideologies but rather one fragmented into particular unbreakable ideas about the nature of class, race, gender, sexuality and sex.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Don't disagree with that, he mentions it in almost every post.

I don't post much. Might of mentioned it a couple of times over the last month or so. It relates to some of my current readings.

Most of this thread is a little too testosterone filled for me, a bleak and drawl display of chest beating. Don't pop in for the personal stuff.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Very clever - bravo. You see ideology isn't what you say its how you act. Can one of you just be honest and say you are petrified of not being able to earn enough to keep wifey at home with the kids. It makes you feel less of a man right? Give us honesty not bullshit sociology written by pathological American woman haters who got their degrees out of a Special K box

I'd like to earn enough to keep myself at home, ideally.

Ideology can occur across of fairly wide spectrum, i'd say most people hold particular beliefs and act in a contradictory way. And that probably applies to a lot of people in this thread regarding their views and actual treatment of women.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[clogged]

I got less half way through the article and knew it was trash. Too many well worn cliches, attacking the same straw man that the hard right conservatives themselves are attacking now.

Marxism, has always been a radically individualistic philosophy, and socialism itself was never going to manifest itself from the crude superstitious industrialised societies of the early 20th century. Marx himself knew this. The Reds didn't seem to catch on.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that the Neo-liberalism and cultural deconstructionism is coming together with stupendous symmetry and uniformity in the early 21st century.

As it stands critical social theory is by its very nature a one sided socioideological critique of society as it is or as its portrayed to be. It by its very transformative nature anti societal, anti institutional and anti government. Perhaps even so far to say in the extreme cases, that its as anti reality as strong conservatism is. It's the type of ideological strain that libertarians can get on, but few other right wingers could really espouse.

It's not to say that critical theory can't itself become more positivist in its dialect. Increasingly it appeals to matter of facts and self evidential truths. II'd go on to say that the inevitable conclusion of cultural Marxism is engrained social change and the creation of new social normatives.

Feminism is arriving at new atomised dialectic, not a whole one like a traditionalist or conservative ideologies but rather one fragmented into particular unbreakable ideas about the nature of class, race, gender, sexuality and sex.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

wut

 

[tesseract]

Not necessarily traditionalist, I'd argue most MRA's argue a particularly modern line for gender relations.

When I say traditionalism it can be inferred as the modern incarnation that you roughly describe / neotraditionalism. I don't think the difference needs to be specifically spelled out given how much technology and ideology has obviously changed peoples thinking toward the traditional family arrangement and gender dynamics to the point of making what traditionalism initially stood for unworkable for most couples in the modern era. Hence the contextual and continued use of the term 'traditionalism'.

I don't think we disagree. It's simply a case of explaining what is meant by 'traditionalism'.

The for women aspect of MRA's is paternalistic, but that is generally no different from the efforts of a declared male feminist.

With the major difference being that MRA's stand for father's rights where inequality under the law exists, while male/feminists are dismissive of such.

 

[Vic Vinegar]

wut

The irony that you respond to a well worded and articulated post with one word that doesn't even belong in the English dictionary should be lost on no-one.

 

[CM86]

The irony that you respond to a well worded and articulated post with one word that doesn't even belong in the English dictionary should be lost on no-one.

Irony...? wut?

 

[Vic Vinegar]

Irony...? wut?

Oh so the urban dictionary is suddenly acceptable?

What was that you lot were saying to tesseract about the urban dictionary? Just a tad hypocritical.....

 

[CM86]

Oh so the urban dictionary is suddenly acceptable?

What was that you lot were saying to tesseract about the urban dictionary? Just a tad hypocritical.....

Hypocritical?... Wut?

Where am I stating, or defending that 'wut' is in the dictionary, and then using the urban dictionary as a reference?

That's two words you have used, irony and hypocrisy, incorrectly. Wanna try for a third?

 

[romeoh]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7903165/Loving-dads-year-of-torment

The feminazis created the atmosphere of the above article which now sickeningly permeates through our society.

Or the people who behave inappropriately, ('sickeningly' even) around children, have created this atmosphere.

 

[clogged]

The irony that you respond to a well worded and articulated post with one word that doesn't even belong in the English dictionary should be lost on no-one.

It's typical humanities student word soup.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Or the people who behave inappropriately, ('sickeningly' even) around children, have created this atmosphere.

And yet you'd point out to anti-Islamic people this same very thought process makes them morons? You know for assuming a few bad eggs makes the rest worthy of being under suspicion...

See, we're having atmospheres created by agenda driven morons and even more morons are getting sucked in by this utter bullshit.

Are you one of them?

 

[romeoh]

And yet you'd point out to anti-Islamic people this same very thought process makes them morons? You know for assuming a few bad eggs makes the rest worthy of being under suspicion...

See, we're having atmospheres created by agenda driven morons and even more morons are getting sucked in by this utter bullshit.

Are you one of them?

Your focus re paedophiles is on the 'poor men' who occasionally get wrongly accused. Whereas the focus should be on the real victims here and the perpetrators.
Quite simple.

 

[tesseract]

Your focus re paedophiles is on the 'poor men' who occasionally get wrongly accused. Whereas the focus should be on the real victims here and the perpetrators.
Quite simple.

Quite simple from your perspective, but I find it to be a worse travesty of justice for an innocent party to be found/deemed guilty than for a guilty party to be found not guilty.

 

[romeoh]

Quite simple from your perspective, but I find it to be a worse travesty of justice for an innocent party to be found/deemed guilty than for a guilty party to be found not guilty.

Yep interesting and I'd probably agree with that principle. But not by much.
And not enough for the law to cease its pursuit of the guilty.

 

[Contra Mundum]

I got less half way through the article and knew it was trash. Too many well worn cliches, attacking the same straw man that the hard right conservatives themselves are attacking now.

Marxism, has always been a radically individualistic philosophy, and socialism itself was never going to manifest itself from the crude superstitious industrialised societies of the early 20th century. Marx himself knew this. The Reds didn't seem to catch on.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that the Neo-liberalism and cultural deconstructionism is coming together with stupendous symmetry and uniformity in the early 21st century.

As it stands critical social theory is by its very nature a one sided socioideological critique of society as it is or as its portrayed to be. It by its very transformative nature anti societal, anti institutional and anti government. Perhaps even so far to say in the extreme cases, that its as anti reality as strong conservatism is. It's the type of ideological strain that libertarians can get on, but few other right wingers could really espouse.

It's not to say that critical theory can't itself become more positivist in its dialect. Increasingly it appeals to matter of facts and self evidential truths. II'd go on to say that the inevitable conclusion of cultural Marxism is engrained social change and the creation of new social normatives.

Feminism is arriving at new atomised dialectic, not a whole one like a traditionalist or conservative ideologies but rather one fragmented into particular unbreakable ideas about the nature of class, race, gender, sexuality and sex.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Your critique is at such a generalised level its impossible to rebut - Who are the proponents of cultural marxism. Do you mean Marxists who analyse culture it just a proxy for the Frankfurt school - its all ******* Marcuse's fault

What are "new social normatives" - I know its a bit much coming from me but sometimes plain English is good - do you mean attitudes, laws, mores, rules of acceptable behaviour?

What is an atomised dialectic;
- thesis _ "feminists are in for their individual career advancement" (atomised):
anti thesis "women are in it to improve the lot of their gender"(collective)
synthesis "what the * is Eastern Rangers talking about"

On your impenetrable last paragraph - do you mean feminists are selfish? what do you mean "unbreakable ideas about the nature of class, race, gender, sexuality and sex" - that is like something from the postmodern generator - its self evident that feminism would have something to say about gender - but class and race?????

 

[Contra Mundum]

Maybe those poor rich white middle class women who are the victims of such incredible oppression can set out and create their own Amazonian woman-only culture.

And **** off and leave the rest of us alone.

Yeh we hate woman - particulary our Mummys who never breast fed us - lets have a man only culture!

 

[Contra Mundum]

obnoxious much ? Does it work with the ladies or do they think you're a fraud ?

..and they accuse me of transference. This whole manism movement and its proponents on this thread seem very Oedepal. I am not the one feeling oppressed or listing the crimes that feminism and women more generally have wrought on MANkind

If someone on this thread could show that women:

• are not more represented in casual employment,
  
• are not paid less,
• are not less represented in management ranks,
  
• are not less represented in parliaments and local government,
  
• are not less represented in board positions
• are not by far the greater victims of physical violence

Then I might take their freudian women hating s**t more seriously.